Weinstein in NYT: literature is scientific, for it traces the route by which we understand our world and ourselves. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/24/opinion/dont-turn-away-from-the-art-of-life.html …
-
-
Replying to @rensbod
@rensbod@agtgibson I think such a comparison doesn't do literature any favours. (on account of it being 1) a stretch and 2) servile )3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @increpare
@increpare@agtgibson We don't have to defend literature. We just have to point out that literature generates knowledge, thus science!1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @rensbod
@rensbod I think I can see@increpare cringe at that. Problem here probably that English lacks an equivalent of Wissenschaft/Wetenschap.2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @agtgibson
@agtgibson@increpare Word meanings are dynamic. It's high time to join efforts in changing the meaning of 'science'.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@rensbod @agtgibson lying, religion, dice rolling, murder, homeopathy, redefining, even tweeting all generate knowledge. It's a low bar.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.